umad?

The X-Trans II is the only implementation of the IMX071 with on sensor phase detection pixels. So yes, this is a custom job. Why no other sensors? Guess Fuji had it's reasons. About the Magnum photo: I think if you downloaded the image it was 6000x4000px. So if it was not upscaled, this would indicate a 24MP sensor

I wouldn't worry about the sensor too much. 1. 24MP seems to be a given. The Magnum leak supports this. (The X-Pro2 with 24MP Sensor seems to be already tested) 2. Nikon likes to source it's sensors from different manufacturers. They used Renesas and Toshiba recently. Since both (fabs) are now run by Sony it would make sense for Nikon to look elsewhere (Samsung). 3. I was never a huge fan of the A6000 sensor. But to be honest: it's probably really good. Take a look what other companies have done with Sony Sensors (Pentax K5II, all the Fujis, most Nikons) and compare them to the "original Sonys". I guess the A6000 sensor could deliver outstanding results. 4. Even if it was a basic A6000 sensor, this would not mean it is exactly the same. Not even manufacturing wise. For example the X-Trans II is a sensor not used by anyone else. This sensor does not exist anywhere else with phase detection pixels (or the X-Trans cfa). So it could be, that we get a slightly improved A6000 5. There is probably coming some new Sony sensor soon, but let's be realistic - how much improvement will it really bring? Looking at the past and the latest improvments, it's probably way below 1/3EV improvement in noise.

I own the 12mm Samyang, and owned the 14mm and 10-24. The 10-24 is good, I'd call it one of the better super wides (probably even the best mirrorless ultra wide zoom). But I preferred the 14mm. By a huge margin. The only reason, why I went for the 12mm Rokinon/Samyang was, that it is faster, and overall better for astro photography. But if astro is not important, I would go for the 14mm without even thinking about it. It's (for me) the best of them.

Do you know how to read (and compare) those charts? And you are aware of the problems, most of those tests have? As one who owned both: the 10-24 is an outstanding lens. But it's also not really small. The 14mm is small and sharp (no matter what the testchart says) and the microcontrast is great. In terms of sharpness I'd put it even infront of the 16mm

I think there was an interview where it was said, that they are working to improve it (dramatically), but don't consider themselves as major player in the video market. So I guess GH4 with log standard is out of the question. And recent votes (for example on dpreview) showed, that most Fuji photographers don't really care about video. So I'd say they will improve it (mostly thanks to a new processor), but it will not be top notch.

Am I the only one, who is not happy with the A6000 AF at all? The specs are nice, and it has many AF fields and good coverage of the sensor with PD pixels, but I find the performance lacklustre. I hope the do some innovation with the hybrid view finder. Not just higher resolution EVF, but something special.

I fixed that for you. That's like saying a car shouldn't be heavy. Or a monitor shouldn't be big. There are cases where they just need to be. Mirrorless gear should be universal. That's the nice thing. You can use a Fuji X-T1 with a 27mm and stay at 500 Gramms, or you can put a grip/battery grip on it and use it with larger lenses like the 16-55 or 50-140.

WR is Weather Resistant not Water Resistant. Just take a look on the Fuji Sites http://www.fujifilm.eu/uk/products/digital-cameras/interchangeable-lens-cameras/model/x-t1/features/tough-weather-resistant-design/ This is how all Manufacturers to it. They can use it for marketing, but since there is no IP5x/IP6x/IP7x certificate, it's just marketing. There are some seals and you can shoot in the rain, next to a waterfall or (as shown) but in in the water for a short period of time. But if you damage it, Fuji (or any other manufaturer) is not obligated to repair it.

I really don't get all the hate. Every lens release people complain, that lenses are too big and heavy. Once a small lens is released it's all about: oh boy that thing is ugly! (It was the same with the renderings of the X-T10, which turned out to look really nice, once you have seen it live) But that's Fujirumors (or the Internet in general). Complain just for the sake of complaining

I'd say it's easy: 12mm Samyang/Rokinon for Astro Photography 14mm for Travel (when weight/size counts) 16mm for ultimate performance - no compromise 10-24mm for flexibility. Nice lens, but for I'd take the primes over the (huge) zooms every time!

i don't think I should convince you. I like buying used As Marc pointed out: a relatively small system camera with awesome lenses? At the moment there is only Fuji (µFT is ok too, but they got another sensor disadvantage - I consider it to be a good video option) There is one thing you should think about: waiting! The X-Pro2 is said to be around the corner (though this corner could be half a year) and a flash system has been rumored for months (it's said that it was pushed back due to problems wit Metz) So think about it: can you live with your current camera for another half year?

My point is: what makes BSI at that pixel size special? I don't really see many benefits (but the price increase is probably dramatic) fast readout? you don't necessarily need BSI for that. Most improvements I see with the A7R II are coming from improvements in the manufacturing process. Using copper instead of aluminum (as samsung already is). Don't know about Sonys process node - Samsung is at 65nm About the manufacturer of the CFA. Fuji was producing sensors until they sold their fab to toshiba. Toshiba makes some really nice sensors (D7100/D7200), which compete (or at the moment even overthrow) with Sonys. Panasonic sold to Tower Jazz, Aptina is now owned by ON Semi. There are also Chinese manufacturers. Others that need to be mentioned are CMOSIS, Renesas (where Nikon produced their sensor designs but the fab was probably bought by Sony), Omnivision and many others. Btw. AMD is no manufacturer, they use Global Foundries. Some of the named sensor producers do the same thing (with TSMC and others) Back to Sony holding back the sensor: http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/06/30/us-sony-issue-idUSKCN0PA0EG20150630 they want to raise 4 billion Dollars for sensor manufacturing. If you spend that money into new fabs and R&D you want to stay on top. And to do so, you need MANY customers. If Sony Device Solutions were to tell all those customers (the biggest one being Nikon) to wait 6 months so Sony Imaging [those are different parts of Sony!) can produce some exclusive cameras, those customers would probably leave Sony - and that (with just 4 billions invested) would be catastrophic. Sony (as a whole) would/should/and probably could not do that.

Physics comes to this conclusion If the fillfactor is the same (scales linear with pixelsize) it doesn't really matter, how many pixels are on the sensor. When you downscale (or, if anyone still does that ) print the file, the overall noise will be the same. It's only with extremely small pixels (taking ~1.4-2µm here) that this ends. This is where manufacturers try to get the fill factor back up by using BSI or even stacked BSI This however only goes for "general purpose cameras". The A7s (and others) are special. It's not that they have a better fill factor, but that there are different sources of noise. The A7s is probably working with dual conversion gain (DR-Pix) cross patented with Aptina. The magic is happening somewhere around ISO3200, when the A7s transforms into an Low Light monster (It's not only noise [sNR], but also the dynamic range)

I think you got it the other way round. Sony is making money off sensors. If they hold them back (for their own use), Nikon, Pentax, Fuji and others will leave them. That means no money for R&D and that leads to the most important part of sony (outside of live insurance and playstation) to fail. No good idea. Sony needs huge sums for R&D to stay on top and that only works with many customers. I have heard about that great sony sensor for months now. Still don't know, what makes it that great. About the CFA: personally I'd like to know, who's manufacturing it. If you compare different color channels (of different cameras) they are significantly different - no chance all those come from the same manufacturer.

Hasn't Fuji already used a combination of optical and in body stabilization (2+3 axis) in it's compact/bridge cameras like the S1 (S9900W etc)? Combining the benefits of OIS (long and specialized lenses, like the 50-140, the upcoming 100-400 or the 120mm macro) and IBIS (and even if they "only" achieve 2-3 stops with 3 axis only) would be pretty awesome!

Poll: Are Fuji Users ready to sacrifice some weight benefits and pay for equivalent to FF lenses? some of those would be: ~ 33mm f/1.0 (equivalent in field of view and depth of field to the 50mm f/1.4 on Full Frame) ~ 56mm f/0.95 (85mm f/1.2) ~ 23mm f/1 (35mm f/1.4) ~ 89mm f/1.4 (135mm f/2) and maybe something Zooms like the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 which is similar to a 24-70 f/2.8 or 10-24 f/2.8 (16-35mm f/4) edit: Poll would go something like this: how much would you be willing to pay for it? (for each lens) o 900 o 1000 o 1100 o 1200 o 1300 o 1400 o 1500 o >1500 o I don't want it

Most would probably want one, but only few would actually buy one. Same with the 100-400 poll If you would ask: how much are you willing to pay for the 100-400? ~2000$ (f/4.5-5.6) ~2500$ (f/4-5.6) ~10000$ (constant f/4) I guess the poll would look a LOT different! By the way I would vote for a 1000 horse power Ford Fiesta - but I would not buy one

Personally (if there weren't the price difference) I would have gone for that APD. It's my portrait lens and I have no light problems there (so the loss of light due to the filter doesn't matter), but the bokeh is nicer. But for a difference for 500€ - that's more than half the 90mm!

probably the 90mm as soon as it's out and then the 120mm 1:1 macro That completes the most important things on my list. Oh, and the 16mm as soon as I can get a used one or save a few bucks. Just can't justify 1000€ right now.

I noticed this too in forums. It's seems like, with the shrinking market, everyone feels threatened. So they start to hate, bash and troll (there are also Fuji Trolls out there!) Strangely I have found, that this fight is worse between supporters of different mirrorless systems than with mirrorless vs dslr. The (as far as I have seen) is µFT vs Sony. Never seen a good discussion, always hate and personal attacks. Business man like the ghost seeing Steve Huff seem to have noticed this "fight" and make use of it. They post polarizing articles, that leave one party cheering (and sharing the article), while the other one is "destroyed". Those users share the article too - all in all generating traffic and income. Most of those "reviewers" are businessmen. (that steve Huff seems to have a personal problem with Fuji is another story)

stabilization in lenses are done with different implementations. If I had to guess, I'd say most versions of face recognition, Dynamic Range Increase are just software (and maybe even hardware) developed by a third party and sold to the manufacturers. Anyway, that live Time feature is a nice to have (but for nearly all photos, you can "survive" without)

Headline is wrong: it says X-T1 instead of X-T10